Interinstrument Reliability of the Jamar Electronic Dynamometer and Pinch Gauge Compared With the Jamar Hydraulic Dynamometer and B&L Engineering Mechanical Pinch Gauge

OBJECTIVE. This study sought to determine interinstrument reliability of the Jamar electronic dynamometer and pinch gauge compared with the commonly used Jamar hydraulic dynamometer and B&L Engineering mechanical pinch gauge. METHOD. Twenty men and 20 women were tested for grip strength with the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe American journal of occupational therapy Vol. 67; no. 4; pp. 480 - 483
Main Author King, Theodore I.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States American Occupational Therapy Association 01.07.2013
American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0272-9490
1943-7676
1943-7676
DOI10.5014/ajot.2013.007351

Cover

More Information
Summary:OBJECTIVE. This study sought to determine interinstrument reliability of the Jamar electronic dynamometer and pinch gauge compared with the commonly used Jamar hydraulic dynamometer and B&L Engineering mechanical pinch gauge. METHOD. Twenty men and 20 women were tested for grip strength with the two different dynamometers, and 17 men and 25 women were tested for lateral pinch strength with the two different pinch gauges. RESULTS. Grip strength measurements were approximately 10% higher with the hydraulic dynamometer, and lateral pinch strength measurements were approximately 18% higher with the mechanical pinch gauge. Paired t tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used for statistical analyses. The two-tailed p value was <.0001, and the ICC indicated poor to moderate reliability. CONCLUSION. When retesting patients, it is recommended that occupational therapists use the same instrument to measure hand strength because interinstrument reliability may be lacking.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-General Information-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:0272-9490
1943-7676
1943-7676
DOI:10.5014/ajot.2013.007351